Title III
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE
Article 68. The husband and wife are obliged to live together, observe mutual love, respect and fidelity, and render mutual help and support.
The three duties of the spouses to each other are:
1. Live together.
2. Observe mutual love, respect and fidelity.
3. Render mutual help and support.
by: Janine Gumangol
Arroyo versus Vasquez De Arroyo
Facts:
Mariano and Dolores were married 1910 and lived together with a few short intervals of separation. In 1920, Dolores left their common home and decided to live separately from Mariano. Mariano induced Dolores to return home but the latter refused. Hence, Mariano filed a petition for a permanent mandatory injunction requiring Dolores to return to the conjugal home and live with him as a wife under pain of contempt. By way of defense, Dolores claimed that she was compelled to leave on the basis of cruel treatment on the part of Mariano. She, in turn, prayed for a decree of separation, a liquidation of their conjugal partnership, and an allowance for counsel fees and permanent separate maintenance. The trial court ruled in favor of Dolores.
On appeal, the SC ruled that Mariano has done nothing to forfeit his right to the marital society of Dolores and that she is under an obligation, both moral and legal, to return to the common home and cohabit with Mariano.
Issue:
May the court order Dolores to return to the conjugal home under pain of contempt.
Held:
No. It is not within the province of the courts of this country to attempt to compel one of the spouses to cohabit with and render conjugal rights to the other. Cohabitation is a purely personal obligation - an obligation to do. To compel the wife to comply with such an obligation would be an infringement of her personal liberty.
Article 69. The husband and wife shall fix the family domicile. In case of disagreement, the court shall decide.
The court may exempt one spouse from living with the other if the latter should live abroad or there are other valid and compelling reasons for the exemption. However, such exemption shall not apply if the same is not compatible with the solidarity of the family. (110a)
Article 70. The spouses are jointly responsible for the support of the family. The expenses for such support and other conjugal obligations shall be paid from the community property and, in the absence thereof, from the income or fruits of their separate properties. In case of insufficiency or absence of said income or fruits, such obligations shall be satisfied from the separate properties. (111a)
Article 71. The management of the household shall be the right and the duty of both spouses. The expenses for such management shall be paid in accordance with the provisions of Article 70. (115a)
Article 72. When one of the spouses neglects his or her duties to the conjugal union or commits acts which tend to bring danger, dishonor or injury to the other or to the family, the aggrieved party may apply to the court for relief. (116a)
Article 73. Either spouse may exercise any legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity without the consent of the other. The latter may object only on valid, serious, and moral grounds.
In case of disagreement, the court shall decide whether or not:
(1) The objection is proper; and
(2) Benefit has occurred to the family prior to the objection or thereafter. If the benefit accrued prior to the objection, the resulting obligation shall be enforced against the separate property of the spouse who has not obtained consent.
The foregoing provisions shall not prejudice the rights of creditors who acted in good faith. (117a)
Title IV
PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE
PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE
CHAPTER 1
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Article 74. The property relationship between husband and wife shall be governed in the following order:
(1) By marriage settlements executed before the marriage;(2) By the provisions of this Code; and
(3) By the local custom. (118)
Article 75. The future spouses may, in the marriage settlements, agree upon the regime of absolute community, conjugal partnership of gains, complete separation of property, or any other regime. In the absence of a marriage settlement, or when the regime agreed upon is void, the system of absolute community of property as established in this Code shall govern. (119a)
Article 76. In order that any modification in the marriage settlements may be valid, it must be made before the celebration of the marriage, subject to the provisions of Article 66, 67, 128, 135 and 136. (121)
Article 77. The marriage settlements and any modification thereof shall be in writing, signed by the parties and executed before the celebration of the marriage. They shall not prejudice third persons unless they are registered in the local civil registry where the marriage contract is recorded as well as in the proper registries of property. (122a)
by: Rose Ann Villanueva
REQUIREMENTS FOR MARRIAGE SETTLEMENTS
1. Must be in writing (public or private)
2. Signed by the parties
3. Executed before the celebration of the marriage
4. If party needs parental consent, parent/guardian must be a party to the settlement
5. If party is under civil interdiction or other disability (not including insanity), court appointed guardian must be a party
6. Must be registered in local civil registry – to affect third persons (If not registered, will not prejudice third persons, ACP will apply)
GENERAL RULE:
All modifications to the marriage settlement must be made before the marriage is celebrated.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Legal Separation (Art. 63 (2)) » In such an instance, the property regime is dissolved.
2. Revival of the former property regime upon reconciliation if the spouses agree (Art. 66 (2))
3. A spouse may petition the court for: a. Receivership b. Judicial separation of property, or c. The authority to be the sole administrator of the conjugal partnership ▪ If the other spouse abandons the other without just cause or fails to comply with his or her obligations to the family. (Art. 128)
4. Judicial Dissolution (Arts. 135 and 136)
Article 78. A minor who according to law may contract marriage may also execute his or her marriage settlements, but they shall be valid only if the person designated in Article 14 to give consent to the marriage are made parties to the agreement, subject to the provisions of Title IX of this Code. (120a)
by: Aneleth Valencia
Explanation
· The age of majority today is 18. At this age, the person is no longer a minor. If the parties are both 18years old, the marriage settlement may be executed without parental consent. As per Article 5 of the Family Code, it states that “Any male or female of the age of eighteen years (18) or upwards not under any of the impediments mentioned in Articles 37 and 38, may contract marriage.
· Please take note that no minor can get married, otherwise it is void. The law is repealed by R.A 6809: An act lowering the Age of Majority to 18 years
“Provides for legal emancipation at age 18; emancipation terminates parental authority over the person and property of the emancipated child who shall thereafter be qualified and responsible for all acts of civil life.”
Article 79. For the validity of any marriage settlement executed by a person upon whom a sentence of civil interdiction has been pronounced or who is subject to any other disability, it shall be indispensable for the guardian appointed by a competent court to be made a party thereto. (123a)
by: Aneleth Valencia
Explanation:
Inter vivos
is a legal term referring to a transfer or gift made during one's lifetime, as opposed to a testamentary transfer (a gift that takes effect on death) under the subject of trust.
Mortis Causa
A phrase sometimes used in reference to a deathbed gift, or a gift causa mortis, since the giving of the gift is made in expectation of approaching death. A gift causa mortis is distinguishable from a gift inter vivos, which is a gift made during the donor's (the giver's) lifetime.
· The guardian of a person sentenced with civil interdiction (as stated in Article 34 of the Revised Penal Code) or a guardian of a person suffering from disability must be made a party to the marriage settlement of either of such persons.
Article 80. In the absence of a contrary stipulation in a marriage settlement, the property relations of the spouses shall be governed by Philippine laws, regardless of the place of the celebration of the marriage and their residence. This rule shall not apply:
(1) Where both spouses are aliens;
(2) With respect to the extrinsic validity of contracts affecting property not situated in the Philippines and executed in the country where the property is located; and
(3) With respect to the extrinsic validity of contracts entered into in the Philippines but affecting property situated in a foreign country whose laws require different formalities for its extrinsic validity. (124a)
by: Kristia Capio
LAW THAT GOVERNS PROPERTY RELATIONS
This is an application of the national law principle regardless of the place of celebration of the marriage, their national law follows them wherever they are. The law applies if the spouses are living in the Philippines or abroad, or even if they have properties located in the Philippines or abroad.
If the spouses are aliens, their national law shall govern their property relationship.
EXCEPTIONS
The two (2) exceptions under paragraphs 2 and 3 are applications of the principle of lex situs.
Principle of Lex Situs - law of the place where property is situated; the general rule is that lands and other immovables are governed by the law of the state where they are situated.
EXAMPLE
X and Y, both Filipinos, were married in Japan. If they enter into any marriage settlements, they shall be governed by Philippine law; hence, they can agree on the conjugal partnership regime, or complete separation. If they have no agreement, then, they shall be governed by the principle that their property relationship is one of absolute community. Or, if the agreement is void, the property relationship shall be absolute community of property.
Article 81. Everything stipulated in the settlements or contracts referred to in the preceding articles in consideration of a future marriage, including donations between the prospective spouses made therein, shall be rendered void if the marriage does not take place. However, stipulations that do not depend upon the celebration of the marriage shall be valid. (125a)
by: Kristia Capio
The consideration of a marriage settlement is the marriage itself. If the marriage does not take place, the marriage settlement is generally rendered void because there would be unjust enhancement of the parties.
However, the rule is not absolute. Provisions in a marriage settlement, however, are separable in that if there are provisions which are invalid but do not affect the rest of the provisions stipulated in the marriage settlement, only the said invalid provisions will be rendered ineffectual while the rest will continue to remain enforced.
EXAMPLE
A and B a future husband and wife agreed on absolute community of property in a marriage settlement. However, the marriage did not take place. Because of this there would be no sense in going ahead with the stipulation in the contract. In this case, the marriage is a condition precedent the non fulfillment of which would naturally render void any stipulation made because of it. Hence, a provision to support the common child of the contracting parties for a particular amount is clearly independent of the fact of marriage
There are rules if the property is encumbered. These are as follows:
1. If the object of the donation has been foreclosed to answer for the unpaid debt of the donor and the amount obtained as a result of the foreclosure is less than the amount of the debt of the donor which was supposed to be satisfied by the foreclosure then the donee, the person received the gift, shall not be liable for any deficiency in the event.
2. On the other hand, if the property is sold and the resulting money obtained is more than the amount of the liability of the donor then the excess shall properly proceed to the donee.
Illustration:
If the mortgage is foreclosed and is sold for Php 70, 000.00, then Evi, the donee, is not under an obligation to pay the deficiency.
However, if the property is sold for Php 120, 000.00, then Evi, the donee, is entitled to the Php 20, 000.00 which is the excess of the total amount of the obligation.
This is because being the owner of the property, the donee is entitled to whatever value of the property which can be obtained. The donation is a conveyance of pure liberality of the donor, and thus the donee cannot seek reimbursement from the donor for the amount which was taken away by creditors as a result of the foreclosure sale.
(1) The celebration of the marriage is a condition sine qua non for the validity of a donation propter nuptias. Donation propter nuptias is a gift on account of marriage. The marriage, being the very reason for the donation, must be celebrated.
(a) If the donation is made by a stranger, the action for revocation may be brought under the ordinary rules on prescription since the Family Code is silent about it. Hence, if the donation is in writing, it must be brought within ten (10) years under paragraph 1, Article 1144 of the New Civil Code. If oral, it must be brought within 6 years.
In the case of non-marriage, the donor has the option to revoke or maintain the donation. There is no prescriptive period within which the donor can revoke or recover the donation given. But Article 1149 of the Civil Code states that actions whose periods are not fixed in this Code or in other laws must be brought within five (5) years from the time the right of action accrues.
Thus, if the marriage is not celebrated, the right of action accrues from the moment the marriage is not solemnized on the fixed date.
Marriage Judicially declared void
- If subsequent marriage is void pursuant to Article 40 in relation to Article 52 and 53 because it has been contracted by a spouse of a prior void marriage before the latter is judicially declared void, the donation shall be revoked by operation of law if the donee-spouse contracted the subsequent void marriage in bad faith.
e.i. The marriage of A and B is void because of "mistake in identity." A, without obtaining a judicial declaration of nullity of his marriage with B, marries C. A know all along that without the declaration, his marriage to C is void.
In case of bad faith on the part of both parties in a subsequent marriage where one previously obtained a judicial declaration of presumptive death under Article 41 to be able to remarry, Article 44 provides that such subsequent marriage is void and all donations shall be revoked by operation of law.
The donor, after the finality of the judicial declaration, can opt to revoke or not pursuant to Article 86 (1).
Example:
If A is validly married to B and subsequently married X while the first valid marriage is subsisting, the subsequent marriage is bigamous, and thus, all donations propter given by X to A may or may not be revoked by X after the finality of the judicial declaration of nullity of the bigamous marriage.
However, any donation propter nuptias given by A (married person) to X may be considered void if A and X were already guilty of adultery or concubinage at the time of the donation [(Article 739 (2)]. It is also void if made at the time when A and X were already living as husband and wife without a valid marriage (Article 87).
If in this case, the marriage of A and B is in itself void and no declaration of nullity has been obtained prior to the marriage of A and X is what is contemplated in Article 40, therefore the donation of X shall be revoked by operation of law upon finality of the judicial declaration of nullity of X's marriage to A.
The respondents filed a complaint with the RTC for the nullification of the deed of absolute sale, claiming that there was no sale but only a mortgage transaction and the documents transferring the title to the petitioner’s name were falsified. The respondents presented the results of the scientific examination conducted by the National Bureau of Investigation of Eliseo’s alleged signatures in the Special Power of Attorney dated April 29, 1992 and the Affidavit of waiver of rights dated April 29, 1992, showed that they were forgeries. Also, the petitioner introduced evidence on the paraphernal nature of the subject property since it was registered in Erlinda’s name.
The RTC ruled for petitioner finding that the property is paraphernal and therefore, the NBI finding that Eliseo’s signatures in the special power of attorney and in the affidavit were forgeries was immaterial because Eliseo’s consent to the sale was not necessary.
(2) All debts and obligations contracted during the marriage by the designated administrator-spouse for the benefit of the community, or by both spouses, or by one spouse with the consent of the other;
(3) Debts and obligations contracted by either spouse without the consent of the other to the extent that the family may have been benefited;
(4) All taxes, liens, charges and expenses, including major or minor repairs, upon the community property;
(5) All taxes and expenses for mere preservation made during marriage upon the separate property of either spouse used by the family;
(6) Expenses to enable either spouse to commence or complete a professional or vocational course, or other activity for self-improvement;
(7) Antenuptial debts of either spouse insofar as they have redounded to the benefit of the family;
(8) The value of what is donated or promised by both spouses in favor of their common legitimate children for the exclusive purpose of commencing or completing a professional or vocational course or other activity for self-improvement;
(9) Antenuptial debts of either spouse other than those falling under paragraph (7) of this Article, the support of illegitimate children of either spouse, and liabilities incurred by either spouse by reason of a crime or a quasi-delict, in case of absence or insufficiency of the exclusive property of the debtor-spouse, the payment of which shall be considered as advances to be deducted from the share of the debtor-spouse upon liquidation of the community; and
(10) Expenses of litigation between the spouses unless the suit is found to be groundless.
Article 95. Whatever may be lost during the marriage in any game of chance, betting, sweepstakes, or any other kind of gambling, whether permitted or prohibited by law, shall be borne by the loser and shall not be charged to the community but any winnings therefrom shall form part of the community property. (164a)
Effect of alienation and encumbrance
Any disposition by one spouse of the said properties, completely without the knowledge of the other is null and void. Under the Civil Code, it was voidable only. There is no prescriptive period as such contract is null and void.
If a Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) of real estate indicates that the person named therein is single when he is married, and the buyer believed in good faith that it was true, it cannot be voided. The remedy is to compel the erring spouse to account for the proceeds of the sale. If the buyer acts in bad faith, then the sale can be voided. If there was knowledge by one spouse but there was no consent, it is voidable.
Within five (5) years, the wife can ask that the contract will be annulled. But if the wife ratifies it, expressly or impliedly, then there is no more cause of action. The contract will be deemed to suffer no legal infirmities. The wife can nullify the whole contract and not just her share in the property involved.
If it was the decision of the wife implemented, the husband can file an injunction suit to stop the implementation of the contract as not being enforceable, as the wife did not have his authority.
Likewise, the husband may file an action to nullify the contract as contrary to law and public policy.
Effect of Incapacity of one of the spouses on administration:
According to Article 253, if the spouse is absent or separated or has abandoned the other, the other may be appointed as the sole administrator through summary proceeding.
If the spouse is an incompetent who is comatose os semi-comatose, the remedy is judicial guardianship.
CHAPTER 2
DONATIONS BY REASONS OF MARRIAGE
Article 82. Donations by reason of marriage are those which are made before its celebration, in consideration of the same, and in favor of one or both of the future spouses.
Article 83. These donations are governed by the rules on ordinary donations established in Title III of Book III of the Civil Code, insofar as they are not modified by the following articles.
by: Janine Gumangol
Donation is an act of liberality by which a person disposes gratuitously of a thing or right in favor of another, who accepts it.
Proper Nuptias-donations by reason of marriage.
Requisites of Propter Nuptias
In order that donations propter nuptias may be valid, the following requisites must be present:
1. They must be made before the celebration of the marriage;
2. They must be made in consideration of the marriage;
3. They must be made in favor of one or both of the future spouses.
Article 84. If the future spouses agree upon a regime other than the absolute community of property, they cannot donate to each other in their marriage settlements more than one-fifth of their present property. Any excess shall be considered void.
by: Janine Gumangol
Article 85. Donations by reason of marriage of property subject to encumbrances shall be valid. In case of foreclosure of the encumbrance and the property is sold for less than the total amount of the obligation secured, the donee shall not be liable for the deficiency. If the property is sold for more than the total amount of said obligation, the donee shall be entitled to the excess. (131a)
by: Evita Teope
Encumbrance is a mortgage or other charge on property assets. If the object of the donation is subject to an encumbrance, it is valid. The reason for this is that the donor is still the owner, even if it is encumbered.
There are rules if the property is encumbered. These are as follows:
1. If the object of the donation has been foreclosed to answer for the unpaid debt of the donor and the amount obtained as a result of the foreclosure is less than the amount of the debt of the donor which was supposed to be satisfied by the foreclosure then the donee, the person received the gift, shall not be liable for any deficiency in the event.
2. On the other hand, if the property is sold and the resulting money obtained is more than the amount of the liability of the donor then the excess shall properly proceed to the donee.
Illustration:
Marlou, the future spouse of Evi, donated a parcel of land worth Php100, 000.00 to the latter. Before the donation, however, the same was mortgaged with the PNB. That donation is considered valid by the law even if there is an existing lien or encumbrance because Marlou, the donor, is still the owner even if it is encumbered.
If the mortgage is foreclosed and is sold for Php 70, 000.00, then Evi, the donee, is not under an obligation to pay the deficiency.
However, if the property is sold for Php 120, 000.00, then Evi, the donee, is entitled to the Php 20, 000.00 which is the excess of the total amount of the obligation.
This is because being the owner of the property, the donee is entitled to whatever value of the property which can be obtained. The donation is a conveyance of pure liberality of the donor, and thus the donee cannot seek reimbursement from the donor for the amount which was taken away by creditors as a result of the foreclosure sale.
Article 86. A donation by reason of marriage may be revoked by the donor in the following cases:
(1) If the marriage is not celebrated or judicially declared void ab initio except donations made in the marriage settlements, which shall be governed by Article 81;
(2) When the marriage takes place without the consent of the parents or guardian, as required by law;
(3) When the marriage is annulled, and the donee acted in bad faith;
(4) Upon legal separation, the donee being the guilty spouse;
(5) If it is with a resolutory condition and the condition is complied with;
(6) When the donee has committed an act of ingratitude as specified by the provisions of the Civil Code on donations in general. (132a)
by: Evita Teope
If the marriage is not celebrated or judicially declared void ab initio except donations made in the marriage settlements, which shall be governed by Article 81;
(1) The celebration of the marriage is a condition sine qua non for the validity of a donation propter nuptias. Donation propter nuptias is a gift on account of marriage. The marriage, being the very reason for the donation, must be celebrated.
(2) The donation may either be made by one spouse in favor of the other. It may be made by a stranger.
(a) If the donation is made by a stranger, the action for revocation may be brought under the ordinary rules on prescription since the Family Code is silent about it. Hence, if the donation is in writing, it must be brought within ten (10) years under paragraph 1, Article 1144 of the New Civil Code. If oral, it must be brought within 6 years.
In the case of non-marriage, the donor has the option to revoke or maintain the donation. There is no prescriptive period within which the donor can revoke or recover the donation given. But Article 1149 of the Civil Code states that actions whose periods are not fixed in this Code or in other laws must be brought within five (5) years from the time the right of action accrues.
Thus, if the marriage is not celebrated, the right of action accrues from the moment the marriage is not solemnized on the fixed date.
But if the marriage is void, as it is contained in a marriage settlement, the period within which to declare the donation void does not prescribe.
However, if it is clear from the marriage settlement that the donation does not depend on the celebration of the marriage (thus it is not a donation propter nuptias), such donation shall remain effective provided that it complies with all the statutory requirements for a valid donation under this title.
Marriage Judicially declared void
The mere fact that a marriage is declared void by law is not enough for the donor to have the right to revoke the donation. There must first a judicial declaration that the marriage is void.
There are five (5) situations that arise depending on the reason for the nullity of the marriage.
- If subsequent marriage is void pursuant to Article 40 in relation to Article 52 and 53 because it has been contracted by a spouse of a prior void marriage before the latter is judicially declared void, the donation shall be revoked by operation of law if the donee-spouse contracted the subsequent void marriage in bad faith.
e.i. The marriage of A and B is void because of "mistake in identity." A, without obtaining a judicial declaration of nullity of his marriage with B, marries C. A know all along that without the declaration, his marriage to C is void.
Prior to the marriage, C gives A a donation propter nuptias. Upon the judicial declaration of the marriage of A and C, the donation shall be revoked by operation of law pursuant to Article 50, which provides that paragraph (3) of Article 43 shall apply in proper cases to marriages which are declared void ab initio under Article 40.
If the donee does not want to return the donated property, the donor should file an action to recover his or her right of action to file which starts from the finality of the judicial declaration of nullity as it is from that time that the right of accrues.
The prescriptive period to file an action to recover is as follows:
If it is a movable property, it shall be 8 years from the time of possession lost;
If it is a real property, it shall be 30 years deemed lost after the finality of judgment.
In case of bad faith on the part of both parties in a subsequent marriage where one previously obtained a judicial declaration of presumptive death under Article 41 to be able to remarry, Article 44 provides that such subsequent marriage is void and all donations shall be revoked by operation of law.
In all other cases where marriage has been declared void on grounds other than Article 40 in relation to Article 52 and 53, and under Article 44, Article 86 (1) shall govern, in this case, bad faith or good faith is irrelevant.
The donor, after the finality of the judicial declaration, can opt to revoke or not pursuant to Article 86 (1).
Example:
(1) marriage was celebrated without a marriage license, the donation may be revoked upon finality of the judicial declaration regardless if donee was in good or bad faith.
(2) the innocent spouse was falsely made to believe that he was marrying the real spouse when in fact, it was an impostor, and gave a donation propter nuptias to said impostor. Such marriage on the ground of 'mistake of identity' [Article 35(5)] is declared void after the finality of the judicial declaration of nullity, the donor may or may not revoke the donation.
If A is validly married to B and subsequently married X while the first valid marriage is subsisting, the subsequent marriage is bigamous, and thus, all donations propter given by X to A may or may not be revoked by X after the finality of the judicial declaration of nullity of the bigamous marriage.
However, any donation propter nuptias given by A (married person) to X may be considered void if A and X were already guilty of adultery or concubinage at the time of the donation [(Article 739 (2)]. It is also void if made at the time when A and X were already living as husband and wife without a valid marriage (Article 87).
If in this case, the marriage of A and B is in itself void and no declaration of nullity has been obtained prior to the marriage of A and X is what is contemplated in Article 40, therefore the donation of X shall be revoked by operation of law upon finality of the judicial declaration of nullity of X's marriage to A.
Article 87. Every donation or grant of gratuitous advantage, direct or indirect, between the spouses during the marriage shall be void, except moderate gifts which the spouses may give each other on the occasion of any family rejoicing. The prohibition shall also apply to persons living together as husband and wife without a valid marriage. (133a)
CHAPTER 3
SYSTEM OF ABSOLUTE COMMUNITY
SECTION 1
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Article 88. The absolute community of property between spouses shall commence at the precise moment that the marriage is celebrated. Any stipulation, express or implied, for the commencement of the community regime at any other time shall be void. (145a)
Article 89. No waiver of rights, interests, shares and effects of the absolute community of the property during the marriage can be made except in case of judicial separation of property.
When the waiver takes place upon a judicial separation of property, or after the marriage has been dissolved or annulled, the same appear in a public instrument and shall be recorded as provided in Article 77. The creditors of the spouse who made such waiver may petition the court to rescind the waiver to the extent of the amount sufficient to cover the amount of their credits. (146a)
by: Ann Villanueva
WAIVER OF RIGHTS:
GENERAL RULE NOT ALLOWED (Art. 89)
EXCEPTIONS
1. with the marriage subsisting, in case of a judicial separation of property, which includes dissolution of absolute community or conjugal partnership as a result of legal separation.
2. in case the marriage is dissolved (by death of one of the spouses) or annulled.
Article 90. The provisions on co-ownership shall apply to the absolute community of property between the spouses in all matters not provided for in this Chapter. (n)
by: Aneleth Valencia
Explanation:
· All matters not covered by the Family Code are governed by the rules on co-ownership.
Note:
Ø The law provides for the property regime in case of common-law relationships and even if the marriage is void, the distribution of the properties shall be based on co-ownership where the parties shall share and share alike.
In Valdez vs. RTC of Quezon City, et al., G.R. No. 122749, July 31, 1996, 72 SCAD 967, said that the property relationship in void marriages ab initio is co-ownership and if ever there is a declaration of nullity of a void marriage, even if based on psychological incapacity, the dissolution of the properties or distribution shall be based on the law on co ownership where the parties shall share and share alike.
Antonio Valdes vs. Regional Trial Court
G.R No. 122749, July 31, 1996
Facts:
Antonio Valdes and Consuelo Gomez were married in 1971 and begotten during the marriage were five children. Valdes sought the declaration on nullity of marriage pursuant to Article 36 of the Family Code which was granted and hereby declared null and void on the ground of their mutual psychological incapacity to comply with their essential marital obligations.
Both Valdes and Gomez are directed to start proceedings on the liquidation of their common properties as defined in Article 147, of the Family Code which explicitly provides that the property acquired by both parties during their union, in the absence of proof to the contrary, are presumed to have been obtained through the joint efforts of the parties and will be owned by them in equal shares, plaintiff and defendant will own their 'family home' and all their other properties for that matter in equal shares. Also, the property regime of petitioner and respondent shall be governed by the rules on co-ownership.
Antonio Valdes moved for reconsideration of the order but was denied.
Issue:
Whether or not Article 147 does not apply to cases where the parties are psychological incapacitated.
Held:
The trial court correctly applied the law. In a void marriage, regardless of the cause thereof, the property relations of the parties during the period of cohabitation is governed by the provisions of Article 147 or Article 148, such as the case may be, of the Family Code. Article 147 is a remake of Article 144 of the Civil Code as interpreted and so applied in previous cases;[6] it provides:
"ART. 147. When a man and a woman who are capacitated to marry each other, live exclusively with each other as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage or under a void marriage, their wages and salaries shall be owned by them in equal shares and the property acquired by both of them through their work or industry shall be governed by the rules on co-ownership.
"In the absence of proof to the contrary, properties acquired while they lived together shall be presumed to have been obtained by their joint efforts, work or industry, and shall be owned by them in equal shares. For purposes of this Article, a party who did not participate in the acquisition by the other party of any property shall be deemed to have contributed jointly in the acquisition thereof if the former's efforts consisted in the care and maintenance of the family and of the household.
This peculiar kind of co-ownership applies when a man and a woman, suffering no legal impediment to marry each other, so exclusively live together as husband and wife under a void marriage or without the benefit of marriage. The term "capacitated" in the provision (in the first paragraph of the law) refers to the legal capacity of a party to contract marriage, i.e., any "male or female of the age of eighteen years or upwards not under any of the impediments mentioned in Articles 37 and 38"[7] of the Code.
Under this property regime, property acquired by both spouses through their work and industry shall be governed by the rules on equal co-ownership. Any property acquired during the union is prima facie presumed to have been obtained through their joint efforts. A party who did not participate in the acquisition of the property shall still be considered as having contributed thereto jointly if said party's "efforts consisted in the care and maintenance of the family household."[8] Unlike the conjugal partnership of gains, the fruits of the couple's separate property are not included in the co-ownership.
SECTION 2
WHAT CONSTITUTES COMMUNITY PROPERTY
Article 91. Unless otherwise provided in this Chapter or in the marriage settlements, the community property shall consist of all the property owned by the spouses at the time of the celebration of the marriage or acquired thereafter. (197a)
Article 92. The following shall be excluded from the community property:
(1) Property acquired during the marriage by gratuitous title by either spouse, and the fruits as well as the income thereof, if any, unless it is expressly provided by the donor, testator or grantor that they shall form part of the community property;
(2) Property for the personal and exclusive use of either spouse. However, jewelry shall form part of the community property;
(3) Property acquired before the marriage by either spouse who has legitimate descendants by a former marriage, and the fruits as well as the income, if any, of such property. (201a)
(1) Property acquired during the marriage by gratuitous title by either spouse, and the fruits as well as the income thereof, if any, unless it is expressly provided by the donor, testator or grantor that they shall form part of the community property;
(2) Property for the personal and exclusive use of either spouse. However, jewelry shall form part of the community property;
(3) Property acquired before the marriage by either spouse who has legitimate descendants by a former marriage, and the fruits as well as the income, if any, of such property. (201a)
by: Kristia Capio
The law enumerates three properties that would form part of the exclusive properties of the husband or the wife:
- A property may have been donated to one of the spouses by a third person during the marriage. Or, such spouse may have inherited a property during the marriage from his/her parents. All of these were acquired by free title and as a rule, they form part of the exclusive properties of the said spouse.
- Properties for the personal and exclusive use of either spouse shall belong to each of them but because of their value, however, pieces of jewelry shall form part of the absolute community of properties.
- If there is a property acquired by a spouse before the marriage and such spouse has legitimate descendants by a former marriage, such property and its fruits are exclusive properties of said spouse.
EXAMPLE
A and B were married. They had three legitimate children. A died then B married C. But before their marriage, B acquired several properties. These constitute her exclusive properties because these were acquired by one who has legitimate children by a former marriage. The purpose of the law is to protect the interest of the legitimate children in the former marriage.
CASE
MUOZ vs RAMIREZ
G.R. No. 156125. August 25, 2010.
BRION, J.
Facts
The residential lot located at 170 A. Bonifacio Street, Mandaluyong City in the subject property was registered in the name of Erlinda Ramirez, married to Eliseo Carlos. Eliseo, a Bureau of Internal Revenue employee, mortgaged said lot with Erlinda’s consent, to the GSIS to secure a P136, 500 housing loan, and payable within twenty years through monthly salary deductions of P1, 687.66 on April 6, 1989. The respondents then built a thirty-six square meter, two-story residential house on the lot. The title to the subject property was transferred to the petitioner by virtue of a Deed of Absolute Sale dated April 30, 1992, executed by Erlinda, for herself and as attorney-in-fact of Eliseo, for a stated consideration of P602, 000.
The respondents filed a complaint with the RTC for the nullification of the deed of absolute sale, claiming that there was no sale but only a mortgage transaction and the documents transferring the title to the petitioner’s name were falsified. The respondents presented the results of the scientific examination conducted by the National Bureau of Investigation of Eliseo’s alleged signatures in the Special Power of Attorney dated April 29, 1992 and the Affidavit of waiver of rights dated April 29, 1992, showed that they were forgeries. Also, the petitioner introduced evidence on the paraphernal nature of the subject property since it was registered in Erlinda’s name.
The RTC ruled for petitioner finding that the property is paraphernal and therefore, the NBI finding that Eliseo’s signatures in the special power of attorney and in the affidavit were forgeries was immaterial because Eliseo’s consent to the sale was not necessary.
Issue
Whether the subject property is paraphernal or conjugal.
Ruling
The property is paraphernal property of Erlinda. As a general rule, all property acquired during the marriage, whether the acquisition appears to have been made, contracted or registered in the name of one or both spouses, is presumed to be conjugal unless the contrary is proved. In the present case, clear evidence that Erlinda inherited the residential lot from her father has adequately refuted this presumption of conjugal ownership pursuant to Articles 92 and 109 of the Family Code. Therefore, the residential lot is Erlinda’s exclusive paraphernal property.
Article 93. Property acquired during the marriage is presumed to belong to the community, unless it is proved that it is one of those excluded therefrom. (160)
SECTION 3
CHARGES UPON AND OBLIGATIONS OF ABSOLUTE COMMUNITY
Article 94. The absolute community of property shall be liable for:
(1) The support of the spouses, their common children, and legitimate children of either spouse; however, the support of illegitimate children shall be governed by the provisions of this Code on Support;(2) All debts and obligations contracted during the marriage by the designated administrator-spouse for the benefit of the community, or by both spouses, or by one spouse with the consent of the other;
(3) Debts and obligations contracted by either spouse without the consent of the other to the extent that the family may have been benefited;
(4) All taxes, liens, charges and expenses, including major or minor repairs, upon the community property;
(5) All taxes and expenses for mere preservation made during marriage upon the separate property of either spouse used by the family;
(6) Expenses to enable either spouse to commence or complete a professional or vocational course, or other activity for self-improvement;
(7) Antenuptial debts of either spouse insofar as they have redounded to the benefit of the family;
(8) The value of what is donated or promised by both spouses in favor of their common legitimate children for the exclusive purpose of commencing or completing a professional or vocational course or other activity for self-improvement;
(9) Antenuptial debts of either spouse other than those falling under paragraph (7) of this Article, the support of illegitimate children of either spouse, and liabilities incurred by either spouse by reason of a crime or a quasi-delict, in case of absence or insufficiency of the exclusive property of the debtor-spouse, the payment of which shall be considered as advances to be deducted from the share of the debtor-spouse upon liquidation of the community; and
(10) Expenses of litigation between the spouses unless the suit is found to be groundless.
If the community property is insufficient to cover the foregoing liabilities, except those falling under paragraph (9), the spouses shall be solidarily liable for the unpaid balance with their separate properties. (161a, 162a, 163a, 202a-205a)
SECTION 4
OWNERSHIP, ADMINISTRATION, EMPLOYMENT AND DISPOSITION OF THE COMMUNITY PROPERTY
Article 96. The administration and enjoyment of the community property shall belong to both spouses jointly. In case of disagreement, the husband’s decision shall prevail, subject to recourse to the court by the wife for proper remedy, which must be availed of within five years from the date of the contract implementing such decision.
In the event that one spouse is incapacitated or otherwise unable to participate in the administration of the common properties, the other spouse may assume sole powers of administration. These powers do not include disposition or encumbrance without authority of the court or the written consent of the other spouse. In the absence of such authority or consent, the disposition or encumbrance shall be void. However, the transaction shall be construed as a continuing offer on the part of the consenting spouse and the third person and may be perfected as a binding contract upon the acceptance by the other spouse or authorization by the court before the offer is withdrawn by either or both offerors. (206a)
by: Evita Teope
In this provision, joint administration and enjoyment (of the community property) highlight the fact that the spouses are co-owners. However, the administration can only be delegated to one.
The joint administration does not mean that the husband and wife always act together.
For instance, verification and certification in a petition or complaint filed in court must be signed by all petitioners; however, with spouses, the signature of one spouse is substantial compliance (even when both spouses are petitioners of the case).
Each of the spouses may be reasonably presumed to have personal knowledge of any action or claim. Each may act individually even without the consent of the other in case of repairs to the property as these matters may require an immediate response.
Improving or embellishing property is to be decided by both.
Preservation may be made by one spouse but if practicable, the spouse should notify the other.
If the alteration redounds to the benefit of the family, the ACP will be held liable under Article 94 (2) and implies that making such alteration is valid.
- Rules on co-ownership apply only suppletory in character. For example, if A repairs the roof, G's consent is not needed. If A beautifies the roof, he or she needs the consent of G.
- If G disapproves, A incurs liability which will apply to the separate property unless G ratifies it.
- If not, G can demand that the roof be removed and the original be returned at the expense of A.
- But if it redounds to the benefit of the family because it has prevented the complete decay of the old leaking roof, the alteration will be paid through the absolute community even without G's consent.
- Under the rules of co-ownership, would have been invalid.
When there is disagreement, the husband's decision shall prevail (an intermediate modus vivendi before going to the court). It is usually the husband who makes the ultimate choices, especially in serious matters. But it is subject to recourse by the wife, which must be availed of within five (5) years which may proceed in a summary proceeding pursuant to Article 253 of the Family Code.
the power to administrer is broadly treated in the first paragraph of Article 96 but may be limited by the law as in the case of the second paragraph.
Effect of alienation and encumbrance
Any disposition by one spouse of the said properties, completely without the knowledge of the other is null and void. Under the Civil Code, it was voidable only. There is no prescriptive period as such contract is null and void.
If a Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) of real estate indicates that the person named therein is single when he is married, and the buyer believed in good faith that it was true, it cannot be voided. The remedy is to compel the erring spouse to account for the proceeds of the sale. If the buyer acts in bad faith, then the sale can be voided. If there was knowledge by one spouse but there was no consent, it is voidable.
Within five (5) years, the wife can ask that the contract will be annulled. But if the wife ratifies it, expressly or impliedly, then there is no more cause of action. The contract will be deemed to suffer no legal infirmities. The wife can nullify the whole contract and not just her share in the property involved.
If it was the decision of the wife implemented, the husband can file an injunction suit to stop the implementation of the contract as not being enforceable, as the wife did not have his authority.
Likewise, the husband may file an action to nullify the contract as contrary to law and public policy.
Effect of Incapacity of one of the spouses on administration:
If one of the spouses is incapacitated, then the other can assume the sole powers of administration.
Appointment as the sole administrator may be made through summary proceeding.
According to Article 253, if the spouse is absent or separated or has abandoned the other, the other may be appointed as the sole administrator through summary proceeding.
If the spouse is an incompetent who is comatose os semi-comatose, the remedy is judicial guardianship.
If the administrating spouse cannot dispose or encumber the property without judicial approval or written consent of the incapacitated spouse. Otherwise, it is void.
SECTION 5
DISSOLUTION OF ABSOLUTE COMMUNITY REGIME
Article 99. The absolute community terminates:
(1) Upon the death of either spouse;
(2) When there is a decree of legal separation;
(3) When the marriage is annulled or declared void; or
(4) In case of judicial separation of property during the marriage under Articles 134 to 138. (175a)
by: Rose Ann Villanueva
ACP TERMINATES UPON (ART. 99)
1. Death of either spouse – follow rules in Art. 103
2. Legal Separation – follow rules in Arts. 63 and 64
3. Annulment or judicial declaration of nullity – follow rules in Arts. 50 to 52
4. Judicial separation of property during marriage – follow rules in Arts. 134 to 138
Termination of the community property to be registered
Effect of legal separation
Article 100. The separation in fact between husband and wife shall not affect the regime of absolute community except that:
(1) The spouse who leaves the conjugal home or refuses to live therein, without just cause, shall not have the right to be supported;
(2) When the consent of one spouse to any transaction of the other is
required by law, judicial authorization shall be obtained in a summary proceeding;
(3) In the absence of sufficient community property, the separate property of both spouses shall be solidarily liable for the support of the family. The spouse present shall, upon proper petition in a summary proceeding, be given judicial authority to administer or encumber any specific separate property of the other spouse and use the fruits or proceeds thereof to satisfy the latter’s share.
(178a)
by: Aneleth Valencia
The Article refers to a separation de facto. In the proper case there can be:
(a) loss of support;
(b)judicial authorization instead of marital consent;
(c)subsidiary solidary liability of the separate property;
(d) judicial authority to administer or encumber the separate property (including fruits
and proceeds) of the other spouse.
Spouses Ricky and Anita Wong, et al. vs.
IAC, et al.
G.R. No. 70082, August 19, 1991
Facts:
Romarico and Katrina are married. They have three children, but they have been living separately from each other most of the time. During the marriage, Romarico acquired a lot consisting of 1,787 square meters. In 1972, while in Hong Kong, Katrina entered into a contract with Anita Wong, whereby she consigned to her pieces of jewelry worth P321,830.95. When she failed to return the jewelries, Anita demanded the payment where Katrina issued a check for P55,000.00. When it bounced, she was sued criminally, but since the obligation was purely civil in nature, a suit for collection of sum of money was filed against her. Judgment was rendered against Katrina. When it became final and executory, the parcel of land was levied upon and sold at a public auction.
Issues:
(1) Whether or not the property is conjugal or not;
(2) Whether the property is liable for the indebtedness of Katrina.
Held:
(1) Having been acquired during the marriage, the property is presumed to belong to the conjugal partnership (Cuenca vs. Cuenca, 168 SCRA 335), even though Romarico and Katrina had been living separately. (Flores vs. Escudero, 92 Phil. 786).
The presumption of the conjugal nature of the properties subsists in the absence of clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence to overcome said presumption or to prove that the properties are exclusively owned by Romarico. (Ahern vs. Julian, 39 Phil. 607). While there is proof that Romarico acquired the properties with money he had borrowed from an officemate, it is unclear where he obtained the money to repay the loan. If he paid it out of his salaries, then the money is part of the conjugal assets and not exclusively his. Proof on this matter is of paramount importance considering that in the determination of the nature of a property acquired by a person during coverture, the controlling factor is the source of the money utilized in the purchase.
(2) The conjugal nature of the properties notwithstanding, Katrina’s indebtedness may not be paid for with the same since her obligation was not shown by the petitioners to be one of the charges against the conjugal partnership. (Lacson vs. Diaz, 14 SCRA 183). In addition to the fact that her rights over the properties are merely inchoate prior to the liquidation of the conjugal partnership, the consent of her husband and her authority to incur such indebtedness had not been alleged in the complaint and proven at the trial. (Manaois-Salonga vs. Natividad, 107 Phil. 268). Furthermore, under the Civil Code (before the effectivity of the Family Code on August 3, 1988), a wife may bind the conjugal partnership only when she purchases things necessary for the support of the family or when she borrows money for the purpose of purchasing things necessary for the support of the family if the husband fails to deliver the proper sum; when the administration of the conjugal partnership is transferred to the wife by the courts or by the husband, and when the wife gives moderate donations for charity. Having failed to establish that any of these circumstances occurred, the Wongs may not bind the conjugal assets to answer for Katrina’s personal obligations to them.
Article 101. If a spouse without just cause abandons the other or fails to comply with his or her obligations to the family, the aggrieved spouse may petition the court for receivership, for judicial separation of property or for authority to be the sole administrator of the absolute community, subject to such precautionary conditions as the court may impose.
The obligations to the family mentioned in the preceding paragraph refer to marital, parental or property relations.
A spouse is deemed to have abandoned the other when he or she has left the conjugal dwelling without intention of returning. The spouse who has left the conjugal dwelling for a period of three months or has failed within the same period to give any information as to his or her whereabouts shall be prima facie presumed to have no intention of returning to the conjugal dwelling. (178a)
by: Aneleth Valencia
Explanation:
The above Article provides a remedy if a spouse has been abandoned. Such as Petition for Receivership, Judicial separation of property and petition for authority to be the sole administrator of the absolute community of property.
There is abandonment by one spouse when he/she left the conjugal dwelling without any intention of returning and when he/she no longer complies with his/her marital, parental and property relations with the family. Said spouse is presumed to have abandoned the family if:
(a) he/she left the conjugal dwelling for a period of three (3) months; or
(b) he/she has failed within three (3) months to give any information as to his or her whereabouts.
The law mentions the obligations of the spouses to the marriage like marital, parental, or property relations;
Ø If a spouse does not perform the obligation to live with the other for a period of three (3) months, the other spouse may go to court and ask for relief. This is so, because the husband and wife are obliged to live together. (Article 68, Family Code).
Ø If one of the spouses fails or refuses to perform the duties to the family like support, care, custody of children; then, there can be abandonment, and the other spouse may go to court and ask for the reliefs granted under the law.
Ø One of the duties to the marriage is the administration of properties of the husband and wife. In fact, the husband and wife have joint administration of the properties of the absolute community (Article 96, Family Code) and the conjugal partnership of gains. (Article 124, Family Code). If one of the spouses fails or refuses to comply with the duty, then, the other spouse may go to court and ask that he/she be appointed the sole administrator of the properties.
No comments:
Post a Comment